Issue No. 193 - October 7 , 2000.
Contents :
1. FRY/ Serbia : MILOSEVIC IN THE MUD
By Zoran Mamula
2. FRY/ Serbia : THE PEOPLE HAVE TO REALIZE THAT MILOSEVIC
WASN'T THE ONLY
PROBLEM
By Sanja Vukcevic
3. Albania: DEMOCRACY WON
Slobodan Rackovic
4. The Czech Republic NUCLEAR PLANT MAKES TROUBLE
By Petruska Sustrova
5. Special addition: NEW AT TOL
Q: Mr. Korac, to begin, please tell
us what your comment is
on Milosevic's address to the nation?
A: It was pathetic behavior. At first, during
the election
campaign, Milosevic was calling us "NATO servants, hyenas and
rats". Then he commanded the Federal election commission to register
132 000 imaginary votes from Kosovo, which was verified even by
the highest law institution in the country - the Federal
constitutional court. And finally, when we rebelled against the
election theft, he sent members of the special police to kill us all.
When all that failed, Milosevic with great reluctance
congratulated Kostunica on his election victory and said that now
he would have more time for his family and grandson. So after theft,
insults and assassination attempts all failed, only then can he
admit defeat. It is maybe the worst self-portrait I have ever seen
in my life. What is interesting is that Milosevic is now depending
on the mercy of the new president, a man whom he insulted and tried
to
steal victory from with the help of the police. His future depends
on
Kostunica's attitude and feeling for justice in order to prevent
Milosevic from further adventures. I think that it is impossible
and that sooner or later the former Yugoslav president will face
court trial and that he will be found responsible for all that he
did, since it is obvious that it was he who ordered the theft of votes
and the attempts to kill citizens in the streets of Belgrade.
Q: How much has the visit of Russian foreign
minister Igor
Ivanov influenced Milosevic to admit defeat and what do you think
about the role of Russia in the post-election crisis in FRY and
its rather indecisive standpoint, and even trying to persuade the opposition
to accept second round of presidential elections?
A: I think that Russia finally saw that Milosevic
was falling.
The new government in Moscow is much less inclined towards the type
of
politicians as is Milosevic, and we shouldn't forget that there
are fewer Russian nationalists who are now sitting in their
parliament and who were traditionally favoring Milosevic. However,
Russia is caught in the middle between her desire to play the part
of a
middle-man and huge frustration because it has turned into a
"wounded giant" and was an important force once. What exactly
Ivanov wanted isn't easy to say, except that he wanted to affirm
the role of Russia in the Balkans? It is interesting that Moscow
always insisted on being a middle-man, and the man who refused
Russian mediation was Slobodan Milosevic. He even refused Putin's
invitation addressed to him and Kostunica to come to Moscow,
although that invitation was degrading to opposition candidates
because it implied that second round of elections should have been
held, although it was already clear that Kostunica won in the
first round. Russia will pay the price of its inconstancy. It
seems that this visit was Ivanov's attempt to repair the damage
and the bad reputation Russia now has among Serbian citizens
because of the infamous role of Moscow during the post election
crisis. Finally, Kostunica himself said that Russia is always
making "one step forward then one step backward" which isn't a
compliment to Russian foreign policy.
Q: How would you comment on the decisive protests
on the 5th of
October; why on that day did such a "critical mass" of several hundred
thousand people gather in one place? There were so many talks
about this critical mass in the last ten years, but there wasn't
any
during the last demonstrations against Milosevic.
A: Many history theories revolve around the
issue of why
something happens at just that particular moment, and it is hard
to say what was decisive in this case, but there were no doubt
many reasons for revolution to happen on just that day. It is
important here to stress the fact that the Democratic opposition of
Serbia didn't become stronger when 19 parties united than those
parties were before, taken together. The decision to nominate
Kostunica was very good, but it doesn't mean there was something
magic in him crucial for victory. Our biggest success is that we
thought that the people wanted change. We participated in the
elections under very harsh conditions. Many told us to boycott
them. Most persistent were Vuk Draskovic, leader of the then biggest
opposition party Serbian reformist movement and leaders of the
ruling coalition in Montenegro, who had strong arguments in favor
of their decision since constitutional changes carried out without
them worsened the position of Montenegro in the federation. But,
we won because we made a good observation that the people have had
enough of
misery, isolation and wars, that - simply put - they've had enough
of Milosevic. After the first round of elections we made another
good judgement. Many, not just Russians but also our friends from
the western countries, advised us to participate at the second
round of elections, saying that we would once again defeat
Milosevic. However, we knew that the people would defend their
will. We were certain that the citizens would physically fight the
police, many of them came armed to the rallies and if police
started to shoot there was a great danger of escalation in armed
conflict. The people were ready to defend their election votes at
any cost. So twice we evaluated the feelings of the people well.
Q: Now it is certain that Kostunica is the
president, but what
will the federal government be? Until now it seemed that
Milosevic's parties SPS and JUL, although they lost the election,
would manage to form a coalition government together with
the Montenegrin Socialist peoples party (SNS) headed by Momir
Bulatovic. However, Milosevic in his address said that SPS will be
in opposition and it seems that SNP is also ready to co-operate
with the Democratic opposition of Serbia which was unimaginable
yesterday.
A: That is now key issue: whether to
hurry and form the
government or wait for further collapse of the SPS, which hasn't made
any statement and the president of which is politically defeated.
We expect to form a government with the Montenegrin SNP. That would
enable us to carry out more active foreign and internal politics
and to regulate our relationship with Montenegro. We talked with the
Montenegrin ruling parties before the elections and decided to
incorporate their program for redefining relations within the
federation into ours. If we formed the federal government, we
could work on it, but the question is whether the SNP, in opposition
in Montenegro and a big opponent to politics of Montenegrin
president Milo Djukanovic, would want to participate in such
program. As a coalition which won the most seats in the federal
parliament we will demand urgent early elections in Serbia. We
have the right to ask it since we really achieved a great victory
and we expect Serbian election in 45 days, the shortest time
possible. So, there are many open issues and nothing is really
over.
Q: You mentioned relations with Montenegro.
Now there are
conditions to repair that relationship, but Montenegrin president
Djukanovic said that official Podgorica won't accept a possible
coalition government made out of SNP and DOS. How can these
problems be resolved?
A: There's no doubt that we will have to talk
about it with
the ruling coalition in Montenegro. The SNP cannot decide what
the relations in the federation will be, that party represents only
the 22
per cent of Montenegrin voters who participated in the federal
elections, while the rest listened to the government and boycotted
the
elections. Serbia and Montenegro will probably have very loose
federal, almost confederate ties and that is the reality and
option Montenegro is entitled to. Of course, there is also the
issue of a referendum on independence. Regarding the constant threats
by the former Belgrade government to Montenegro, that must stop
immediately. My personal opinion is that the head of the Yugoslav army
Nebojsa Pavkovic and the federal defense minister Dragoljub Ojdanic
who threatened Montenegro have to leave their offices. They formed
the Seventh battalion and its soldiers, and this battalion I have personally
seen provoking Montenegrins by singing chetnic songs
as they walked down the streets of Podgorica with three fingers
raised in the air. They can be relieved of their offices by the
Supreme defense council and its session will be held very soon. That
council is now made out of Vojislav Kostunica, Milo Djukanovic and
Serbian president Milan Milutinovic. A majority of votes is enough
for change, and Kostunica can even himself decide and fire the
generals. I want to state this clearly: the new state and new army
administration will never again be a threat to Montenegro.
Q: The last, but not the least important question
in this
interview is the co-operation of FRY with the Hague Tribunal. During
the election campaign but also now that he is a president,
Vojislav Kostunica has said many times that the Hague Court is a political
and not a legal institution and that he would not hand over
Slobodan Milosevic and other officials accused of war crimes since
such a possibility is banned by the Serbian constitution. What do
you think about this issue?
A: Mr. Kostunica can have such an attitude
towards relations
with the Hague Tribunal as a party president. It is his right. But
as the Yugoslav president he will be very quickly facing
the obligations of the country towards the international community.
If
he thinks that he can co-operate with the international community
and at the same time ignore the existence of the Hague Court which
was founded by the UN Security Council, and we want to keep our
seat in the UN, then he is wrong. Anybody who agrees with
Kostunica on that matter should best carefully look at Croatia
that also didn't want to co-operate with the Tribunal but had to
accept it in the end.
Q.: Which are the first steps the new Yugoslav
government will have
to take in order to start true democratization of the society?
A: The steps necessary for the full democratization
of Serbia are
the liberating of the main electronic media from state control. We
shall see very soon whether journalists are now able to carry on
their work in a professional manner. The second step is the depolitization
of the army and police forces, and a radical cut in their influence.
That process will be extremely painful in Serbia since those were
the only jobs that provided some at least some wages. The third
step is the formation of serious political parties with their own
distinct program that don't deal only with the issue of national
identity. This means complete restructuring of the Serbian political
scene with the Serbian reformist movement with their monarchist
program, Serbian radical party which still represents only a
movement, etc. Untill now they were all in the centre,
centre-right or at the right end so their program was based on
anti-left messages. I think that won't be enough for a Serbia that
is hungry, underemployed, full of miserable retired persons and
workers who don't receive their wages. We need to redefine the
poltical scene with a real, quality left. We must stress that it
was the strike of mine-workers in Kolubara that was the strongest
blow to the regime, it was the moment when the police gave up on
fighting the citizens. The same power is the power that will be
facing new Yugoslav authorities if they don't find an agreement
with the workers. And now the language of monarchy, nationalism
and merciless market isn't enough, waving three fingers in the air
cannot be the substitute to a political program.
Q : Will Kostunica become a new Serbian
leader and can he
tackle those problems in the right way?
A: I think Kostunica will be a transitionary
figure since he
is no politician, but a rather rigid person, a lawyer and a
nationalist. At the same time he has around him a wide coalition
and that requires great political skill. He was almost the perfect
person to confront Milosevic since he himself was a mystery, but
now he will have to deal with specific political issues. That
calls for persons that will have a more specific policy. Serbian
political ideology was mostly centralistic, which is very
unsuitable for a situation which demands decentralized government
with toleration for differences. The problem with Kostunica is not
the fact that he labels himself as a Serbian nationalist, but rather
that he is also very centrally-inclined and he would be at loss
to offer the real solution for Montenegro, Kosovo, Voivodina and
Sandzak within the Yugoslavian frame. The solution cannot be
centralized without enormous pressure on the provinces.
Yugoslavia will be a truly federal state or non-existent. It is
the task of the Serbian democratic forces to live in a country with
regional differences that can be tollerated.
One cannot see any note of self-criticism in the
long and deep
interviews Kostunica gave. He assumed the role of a professor and
talked for hours about everything but the responsibility of Serbia
and
Serbs for the regime that has been punishing them and their
neighbours for a decade. That can be seen by his attitude towards
the court in the Hague. One must say that this court isn't
"punishment" for Serbia, but the pressure to resolve the issue of
Serbian nationalism in the right way. The Serbian people have to
become aware that it wasn't Milosevic who voted for himself at the
elections, that Milosevic didn't kill any of the several
thousand dead Bosniaks in Srebrenica, that he didn't personally
torture any wounded Croats in Vukovar hospital. Such politics
first has to be condemned by its own people and then Serbia itself
should punish those who comitted war crimes.
Q: Kostunica and Sernia expect soon the lifting
of the sanctions
because of the democratic changes after the elections on 24th
September. Can the international community be so tolerant towards the
new but still nationalistic government in Belgrade?
A: The international community should recognize
Kostunica who
obviously won the elections, it should welcome new the Serbian
government and express hope that the new government will be
democratic and tolerant and then firmly and kindly set up the same
requests as those put up before Croatia as a condition to be
included in European integrations - change of attitude towards the
Hague court, freedom of the press and general democratization of
the society.
WEEK IN REVIEW
(Free Access)
http://www.tol.cz/week.html
Albania Passes Stability Test in Local Poll
IMF/World Bank Summit Disrupted by Violence
Polish President Unscathed by Campaign Mishaps
Russia Plays Neutral Over Yugoslav Crisis
Belarus Opposition Rally Meets with Calm Success
Alleged Nazi War Criminal Dies before Conclusion of Trial
Local Paper Decries "Purge" of Slovenian Defense Ministry
Azeri President Alive, Surprised To Hear He Had Died
Olympic Drug Scandal Angers Romanians
Olympic Medal Roundup
OUR TAKE: The Worm Is Turning
Is Yugoslavia finally prepared to dump Milosevic?
http://www.tol.cz/ouroct2.html
This month's "In Focus" package: Rotten To the Core
http://www.tol.cz/pack.html
There are many words for it: adulteration, debasement,
decay,
defilement, distortion, falsification, putrefaction, rottenness.
Some are more harsh-sounding than others, but they all mean the
same thing--corruption--and the region is riddled with it from top
to bottom. While it is usual to define corruption in terms of
officialdom, in most cases, it is rooted deep in culture.
IN FOCUS: Willing Accomplices
Feature by Mykhaylo Gryshchenko
http://www.tol.cz/frartic/willing.html
Free for One Week
Corruption in Ukraine is a contagious illness that
has
permeated the country's entire bureaucracy, not to mention its
people. The perception of Ukraine as a place where petty
corruption is rampant has gained acceptance among scholars,
journalists, and the wider public. Disclosures in the media, and
the personal experiences of Westerners and Easterners who have
dealt with Ukrainian officials at all bureaucratic levels have
contributed to the country's international notoriety.
IN FOCUS: Debilitating Georgian Corruption
Feature by Christoph Stefes
http://www.tol.cz/oct00/georgia.html
Georgia has made some modest gains in its anti-corruption
drive by targeting the cause rather than the symptoms. But trying
to eradicate illicit activities with the iron fist of the law is a
pointless attempt, law enforcement bodies belong to the most
corrupt state agencies in Georgia. Further progress, however,
would require a sufficient number of incorruptible
officials--something in dangerously short supply.
IN FOCUS: Might Makes Right
Opinion by Brian Whitmore
http://www.tol.cz/frartic/might.html
Free for One Week
Earlier this year in Russia, machine-gun-toting
riot police in
camouflage and ski masks stormed Guta-Bank, one of Moscow's
largest. Under the pretense of investigating the bank's finances,
the police smashed down a door, seized documents, and scared the
wits out of the bank's employees. Part of President Vladimir
Putin's campaign to stamp out corruption and establish a
"dictatorship of law" in Russia? Not quite. In contemporary
Russia, corruption allegations are dragged out for a number of
reasons, and none of them have anything to do with fighting
corruption.
IN FOCUS: Clans, Cotton, and Currency
Opinion by Mikhail Degtiar
http://www.tol.cz/oct00/clans.html
Since medieval times, government positions in the
Bukharian
Emirate were sold, rather than earned. After purchasing a post, an
official would discover that he then had to earn his living and
pay off his superiors by levying "extra" taxes and fines on the
people. This pyramid scheme of officialdom violated no moral norms
or laws whatsoever. Starting with cotton and ending with clans,
corruption has infiltrated the highest levels of government in
Uzbekistan--tradition wouldn't have it any other way.
IN FOCUS: The Drawbacks of Exposing Corruption
Feature by Rustam Temirov
http://www.tol.cz/oct00/drawbacks.html
In May 1998, broadcast journalist Yashin Kurbanov
ran two
stories critical of local authorities on prime-time news programs
on Jizzak television, a privately owned outlet in southern
Uzbekistan. Almost immediately after the programs were aired,
Kurbanov was fired. If it has to do with exposing corruption or
anything critical of the state, Uzbek journalists have learned to
let it go--one call from local authorities can put a journalist in
jail or out on the street.
IN FOCUS: Not Toeing the Line
Reportage by Marius Dragomir
http://www.tol.cz/oct00/not.html
Over 300 journalists are still facing libel suits
in Romania,
most of them for investigating corruption. With many newspapers
controlled by shady tycoons interested in tripping up their
rivals, journalists get plenty of practice following corruption
stories. But who journalists can investigate is strictly limited:
Reporters will often find themselves in hot water for following
the "wrong kind of story." Marius Dragomir--a former investigative
reporter for a regional newspaper, has had six libel suits filed
against him in the last five years--gives a first-hand account of
the trials and tribulations of investigating corruption.
FEATURE: Licking Their Wounds
by Luke Allnutt
http://www.tol.cz/frartic/specr10002.html
Free for One Week
For anti-globalization protesters the imagery was
stark and
irresistibly simple. Up in the fortress on the hill the IMF/World
Bank delegates wined, dined, and discussed the new world order,
protected by a black moat of police officers. Below, the
disaffected masses bayed: Rioters and residents choked on the tear
gas that hung low in the valley. In Prague, anti-globalization
protests turned from carnival to carnage.
FEATURE: The Calm Before the Storm?
by Dragan Stojkovic
http://www.tol.cz/frartic/specr10001.html
Free for One Week
It's not over yet. But on 2 October, things did
start to
change as the opposition set in motion a general strike. Thousands
turned out in a show of support for opposition candidate Vojislav
Kostunica's stated victory, truck and taxi drivers blockaded major
roads, and state-run media outlets renounced their loyalty to the
regime and called on their colleagues to do the same. Are the
people ready to see a general strike through to what may be a
bitter end?
OPINION: The Cost of Blind Insistence
by Mercedes Sprouse
http://www.tol.cz/opina/thecosto.html
The words were written with presumed conviction:
"[We] express
hope that your genius will allow the Lithuanian nation to
participate in your victorious crusade to destroy Judaism,
Bolshevism, and plutocracy." It was a self-proclaimed interim
government of Lithuania that expressed its "deepest gratitude" to
Adolf Hitler in 1941 for "saving the Lithuanian nation from
degradation." It was inevitable that these sentiments would one
day erupt with the political equivalent of a bomb. And explode
they did ahead of 8 October parliamentary elections, leaving Jews
enraged and observers perplexed.